WordPress.com has a cool feature; it identifies posts of other bloggers that have been tagged. You can set up searches for those key words, like “gun control” and see when someone makes a post using it. I’ve been checking out blogs and commenting for a couple of weeks. Yesterday I left a comment in response a post that ended with this:
How well do our laws “promote the general welfare”?
This other narrative is also in Scripture.The gospel lesson this week is Matthew’s account of the Beatitudes from the Sermon on the Mount. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God”. (Matt 5:9)
We share this narrative in the stories we tell, in the votes we cast, in the way we spend our time and talents, and in the energy we give to share a better vision for this world in which we live.
Who are we? Who do we want to be? How are we willing to make changes to get there?
This was my comment (in case it goes away like my other two comments did):
Okay…let’s put aside the fact that correlation does not equal causation (more guns doesn’t necessarily mean more violence), Let’s put aside the fact that the CDC in their 2002 report found insufficient data to show any gun law or combination of gun law reduced violence.
Let’s put aside the fact that Mexico has very strict gun laws (only 1 legal gun store in the country).
What laws do you want to enact that will make a difference?
What laws will allow individuals to protect themselves and yet will prevent those tools of protection from being used in crimes?
Or do you think people shouldn’t be allowed to protect themselves?
What suggestions do you have on how we move forward?
No recitation of data or statistics. Just statements of facts. Apparently that counts as presenting competing data and reports. And isn’t needed — as if our conversation should be based solely on emotion or feelings. So be it, I tried again — no data, no statistics, just where do we go, what ideas does she have.
And any comments will be deleted that 1. threaten violence, 2. come from a blog that condones or advocates using gun violence to make their point, and/or 3. tries to offer further “data” on one side or the other. As I said in the post, this is about the narrative we are creating as a nation. You will not change my mind with your “data”. Not interested in changing your mind or watching you try to change mine.
1- I never threatened violence, 2- I don’t condone using ‘gun violence’ or any type to make a point and 3- the only data I offered was the fact that murderers tend to already have felony convictions prior to their arrest for homicide. That was offered as a solution point — keeping violent felons in jail.
This is right out of the Anti-Rights Cultists play book
#1: ALWAYS FOCUS ON EMOTIONAL AND VALUE-DRIVEN ARGUMENTS ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE, NOT THE POLITICAL FOOD FIGHT IN WASHINGTON OR WONKY STATISTICS
I left two messages, both have been moderated out of existence, trying to have that narrative. Apparently I’m the wrong type of person because I believe our narrative should be crafted on real honest information that everyone knows. Or that I simply try to refute the claims of people like her. Not sure which. Maybe one or more of you might have better luck if you want to give it a try.
This is the type of person we face; they claim to want to have a conversation (one we’ve been trying to have for decades) but don’t really.
Please join the discussion — either here or at her place.